Appreciating Rocky

First topic message reminder :

Morning

Since this fighter is one of the most beloved/underrated/overrated on the board I'd like to take an opportunity, once and for all , to memorialise some thoughts on him.

From what I've read and learned about Rocky Marciano over the many years in the beginning he was an acquired taste; it took a long time. But, even the sceptics soon become Marciano believers. He apparently was clumsier in sparring than many could imagine a ham-‘n’-egger against most half-decent boxers in the gym wearing his 16-ounce gloves that looked like the fluffy pillows from Debenhams the wife keeps buying for some reason each week. I see the flaws what the doubters see on tape don't get me wrong, but every guy who looked like they boxed rings around him, the ones who pinned his ears back, the ones never missed him with jabs, came out of the ring looking like he was dropped from a 10-story building and landed flat-footed. Rocky's cuffing, pawing, mauling, grazing shots, flicks to the sides when he was tied-up on the inside, impacted them like they'd been bumped by a rhino. From ringside many reporters said when Rocky landed, the only evidence was an "OOPH!" grimace and quiver.

Rocky was ponderous. Fighters could see the punches. They weren't surprised; they were beat down, every sparring partner who looked sensational against him, said the same thing exiting the ring: "I hurt all over." The wonderkinds and Robinson-clones that watched Rocky in the gym or at the Garden and licked their lips at a future match thought of him like cancer: He could only happen to the other guy.

Off a stat sheet, any number of guys now would be favoured over him, but doing it in the ring proved it would be a sobering experience. The lads yesterday Jeff, Windy, Chris etc mentioned how Archie one of the toughest creatures on earth held Rocky in the highest esteem.

There are certain dimensions to his game, that are not immediately obvious, that quickly became apparent to anybody who shared a ring with him from Louis to Ali.

I cant remember who said "it hurt to bump into him", but they probably summed it up best. He could seemingly make an oponent hurt for every second of every round, and he was a lot more unpredictable than people think.

This is one fighter who definitely had the devil inside him.

I tend to rate him in the listings higher than most, Rocky is my number 3, not the most glamorous c.v I accept, however his undefeated feat and winning streak is yet to be replicated in any era at the heavyweights top level, that is proof to me thats how difficult it is.

Thanks and have a great day.

Pardon? Lost me there.

Have Marciano around 7/8 in the heavyweight ranks

And Azania your well aware im far from the only one tired of you

BALTIMORA wrote:Pardon? Lost me there.

Where would you rank marciano on a list of ATG heavyweights? Not a hard question.

I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

prettyboy1304 wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Pardon? Lost me there.

Where would you rank marciano on a list of ATG heavyweights? Not a hard question.

No, it's not but it isn't the post I was responding to... It was aimed at the previous post.

BALTIMORA wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:Pardon? Lost me there.

Where would you rank marciano on a list of ATG heavyweights? Not a hard question.

No, it's not but it isn't the post I was responding to... It was aimed at the previous post.

Sorry

No harm done mate.

prettyboy1304 wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:Rocky beating Joe Louis holds as much relevance historically as Lennox Lewis beating Mike Tyson. Tyson and Louis were well past their best years. Do we agree on that or no?

Louis had won 8 straight going into the Marciano fight. In Tysons 8 fights before Lewis he had 2 defeats to Holyfield 2 no contests Norris and Gollota although Gollota was due to him testing positive for pot after the fight and 4 wins all by KO decent form but not 8 straight is it?

Boxrec'd or actually seen the fights? If your Boxrec'ing then post the opponents won - loss records.

Bivins had 20 losses while Savold had 36 - just to help you lol. 8 straight wins sounds great the way you put it but you forget to add the details the all important details!

Louis and Tyson were in the same place when they lost to Marciano and Lennox - having watched all the fights they were both faded going in.

Ahhhh we have another guy who's only source of information is Boxrec, good grief

The Mighty Atom wrote:Have Marciano around 7/8 in the heavyweight ranks

And Azania your well aware im far from the only one tired of you

That may well be the case. I suspect there may be a line as long as a dole queue. But you're the only one who hurls insults. All I am asking is for you to debate in a civil manner and refrain from insults.

It is that simple that even you with your vast knowledge should be able to understand.

Have I made myself clear?

WelshDevilRob wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

WelshDevilRob wrote:Rocky beating Joe Louis holds as much relevance historically as Lennox Lewis beating Mike Tyson. Tyson and Louis were well past their best years. Do we agree on that or no?

Louis had won 8 straight going into the Marciano fight. In Tysons 8 fights before Lewis he had 2 defeats to Holyfield 2 no contests Norris and Gollota although Gollota was due to him testing positive for pot after the fight and 4 wins all by KO decent form but not 8 straight is it?

Boxrec'd or actually seen the fights? If your Boxrec'ing then post the opponents won - loss records.

Bivins had 20 losses while Savold had 36 - just to help you lol. 8 straight wins sounds great the way you put it but you forget to add the details the all important details!

Louis and Tyson were in the same place when they lost to Marciano and Lennox - having watched all the fights they were both faded going in.

I've watched the Louis vs Marciano fight and a lot of Louis's fights. I'm not saying Marciano beat a prime Louis but the Louis that fought Marciano would have destroyed Lewis or Tyson. I did use boxrec to find out Louis's exact form going into the fight.

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

The fact I would pick him to beat any of them. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitnees and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower all of the above IMO.

BALTIMORA wrote:Pardon? Lost me there.

Apparently Holmes's criticism of Rocky was mentioned by John McCain (I could be wrong as to who mentioned it) in the US senate (or one of their political houses).

Any boxer in the 1950s or 1960s who wasn't full of wholesome praise of Rocky was asking for trouble imo. It was a sign of the times.

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

The fact I would pick him to beat any of them. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitnees and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower all of the above IMO.

Also slow, easy to hit, decked by a light heavy and cuts easy. Rock was absolutely made for a killer like Foreman.

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

The fact I would pick him to beat any of them. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitnees and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower all of the above IMO.

Also slow, easy to hit, decked by a light heavy and cuts easy. Rock was absolutely made for a killer like Foreman.

It would have been a cracker with the lean mean punching machine Big George. Think Rocky was better on the inside and that would have been the key for me.

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

The fact I would pick him to beat any of them. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitnees and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower all of the above IMO.

Also slow, easy to hit, decked by a light heavy and cuts easy. Rock was absolutely made for a killer like Foreman.

It would have been a cracker with the lean mean punching machine Big George. Think Rocky was better on the inside and that would have been the key for me.

Frazier was also better on the inside that Goerge. The problem is getting past those huge shots to land your own. Plus foreman was extremely strong and simply shoved Frazier away.

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

The fact I would pick him to beat any of them. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitnees and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower all of the above IMO.

Also slow, easy to hit, decked by a light heavy and cuts easy. Rock was absolutely made for a killer like Foreman.

It would have been a cracker with the lean mean punching machine Big George. Think Rocky was better on the inside and that would have been the key for me.

Frazier was also better on the inside that Goerge. The problem is getting past those huge shots to land your own. Plus foreman was extremely strong and simply shoved Frazier away.

IMO just far to busy for Foreman or Frasier that and his superior stamina would win it for me.

Well, much as I've been entertained by this WUM stuff, I'm off to bed. However did the world get by when everything was black & white..?

BALTIMORA wrote:Well, much as I've been entertained by this WUM stuff, I'm off to bed. However did the world get by when everything was black & white..?

2 world wars and the holocaust and the dropping of the atom bomb. It barely got by.

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:I would have him 5th behin Ali, Louis, Tyson and Holmes

Based on what? Ahead of Lewis, Foreman, Frazier, Holyfield, Charles?

The fact I would pick him to beat any of them. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitnees and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower all of the above IMO.

Also slow, easy to hit, decked by a light heavy and cuts easy. Rock was absolutely made for a killer like Foreman.

It would have been a cracker with the lean mean punching machine Big George. Think Rocky was better on the inside and that would have been the key for me.

Frazier was also better on the inside that Goerge. The problem is getting past those huge shots to land your own. Plus foreman was extremely strong and simply shoved Frazier away.

IMO just far to busy for Foreman or Frasier that and his superior stamina would win it for me.

He'd be busy picking himself off the canvas.

You just don't give up AZ. I think Frasier would do better than Foreman agaisnt Rocky as like you said he was better on the inside than Big George.

Well well well, some interesting reading.

Sorry Azania, but you don't half talk some garbage, mate. I am in the same camp as Windy/Jimmy and the rest on this one, and the utter nonsense you are talking is not only disrespectful of a great, great fighter, but disrespectful of fellow posters, with your blind ignorance of their (extremely valid) opinions. Would have expected a bit more from a mod, if I'm honest.

Fists of Fury wrote:Well well well, some interesting reading.

Sorry Azania, but you don't half talk some garbage, mate. I am in the same camp as Windy/Jimmy and the rest on this one, and the utter nonsense you are talking is not only disrespectful of a great, great fighter, but disrespectful of fellow posters, with your blind ignorance of their (extremely valid) opinions. Would have expected a bit more from a mod, if I'm honest.

He does talk garbage but don't see how his opinion can be viewed as disrespectful to Marciano or any other poster. It's an opinion he's not stating facts.

So completely ignoring other posters opinions is not disrespectful, despite these opinions being backed up with the words of the great and good from the boxing world?

Azania is disrespectful in the way that once he has his own belief, that's it, nobody elses thoughts matter, and most definitely are'nt correct.

And yes, it is disrespectful of Rocky's record to suggest that some of the tripe that Holmes/Tyson etc fought are of a better standard. We all know that is incorrect.

I don't see it as disrespectful to have an opinion despite others disagreeing. If we were to all defer to the opinions of the experts there wouldn't be much debate.

Fists of Fury wrote:So completely ignoring other posters opinions is not disrespectful, despite these opinions being backed up with the words of the great and good from the boxing world?

Azania is disrespectful in the way that once he has his own belief, that's it, nobody elses thoughts matter, and most definitely are'nt correct.

And yes, it is disrespectful of Rocky's record to suggest that some of the tripe that Holmes/Tyson etc fought are of a better standard. We all know that is incorrect.

It may not be correct I don't agree with AZ. But it's his opinion it isn't being disrespectful. He never ignored me we had this debate last night.

Scottrf wrote:I don't see it as disrespectful to have an opinion despite others disagreeing. If we were to all defer to the opinions of the experts there wouldn't be much debate.

If we all agreed this forum would be the worst on 606v2 and not the best.

prettyboy1304 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:I don't see it as disrespectful to have an opinion despite others disagreeing. If we were to all defer to the opinions of the experts there wouldn't be much debate.

If we all agreed this forum would be the worst on 606v2 and not the best.

I'm just itching to say ' I disagree.'

Yep, couldn't resist it. For the record, prettyboy, I DO agree with you, though I also find that az has extremely bizarre views on the ' black and white ' guys.

HumanWindmill wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:I don't see it as disrespectful to have an opinion despite others disagreeing. If we were to all defer to the opinions of the experts there wouldn't be much debate.

If we all agreed this forum would be the worst on 606v2 and not the best.

I'm just itching to say ' I disagree.'

Yep, couldn't resist it. For the record, prettyboy, I DO agree with you, though I also find that az has extremely bizarre views on the ' black and white ' guys.

AZ has strange views on most topics and he is extremely stubborn but no matter how crazy or strange he should be allowed an opinion. I mean Johnny Nelson gets payed for his!

prettyboy1304 wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:

Scottrf wrote:I don't see it as disrespectful to have an opinion despite others disagreeing. If we were to all defer to the opinions of the experts there wouldn't be much debate.

If we all agreed this forum would be the worst on 606v2 and not the best.

I'm just itching to say ' I disagree.'

Yep, couldn't resist it. For the record, prettyboy, I DO agree with you, though I also find that az has extremely bizarre views on the ' black and white ' guys.

AZ has strange views on most topics and he is extremely stubborn but no matter how crazy or strange he should be allowed an opinion. I mean Johnny Nelson gets payed for his!

As I say, mate, I DO agree with you.

Windy, my views about some old timers may be bizarre, but I have the right to air them free from personal abuse. Of course they can be ridiculed and I actually enjoy the banter when they are ridiculed. But I draw a line at insults and name calling. Not just because I'm a mod, but because its uncalled for.

azania wrote:Windy, my views about some old timers may be bizarre, but I have the right to air them free from personal abuse. Of course they can be ridiculed and I actually enjoy the banter when they are ridiculed. But I draw a line at insults and name calling. Not just because I'm a mod, but because its uncalled for.

You're preaching to the converted, az.

You and I have NEVER had a problem, have we ?

With Windy on this, you are well aware of my perception of your views on the old timers Az but as you tend to argue your views in a civil way I can't see a problem, as wrong as your views patently are.

Fists of Fury wrote:Well well well, some interesting reading.

Sorry Azania, but you don't half talk some garbage, mate. I am in the same camp as Windy/Jimmy and the rest on this one, and the utter nonsense you are talking is not only disrespectful of a great, great fighter, but disrespectful of fellow posters, with your blind ignorance of their (extremely valid) opinions. Would have expected a bit more from a mod, if I'm honest.

Yes I am very stubborn. That's mainly because this opinion I have of Rocky as a boxer is something I firmly believe. I dont take much heed of the opinion of those he fought mainly because of who Rocky was, his popularity and the times he fought in. I have never denied he hit hard. Who can. The evidence is there for all to see. But his record doesn't stack up to any form of scrutiny. Fighting and beating old men, old LHW, has beens and never will be in a crude manner does not make you an ATG in any era.

I dont know if any of you guys have seen Coming to America, but the opinions said in the barber shop scene is very valid.

I dont see how I am being disrespectful to other posters by having my opinion, especially when I air them free from insults and have repeatedly said that I indeed do respect the opinions of others....although I respectfully disagree with it.

HumanWindmill wrote:

azania wrote:Windy, my views about some old timers may be bizarre, but I have the right to air them free from personal abuse. Of course they can be ridiculed and I actually enjoy the banter when they are ridiculed. But I draw a line at insults and name calling. Not just because I'm a mod, but because its uncalled for.

You're preaching to the converted, az.

You and I have NEVER had a problem, have we ?

No worries old man.

Debate is healthy. Differences are even healthier as it makes any board more interesting, entertaining and informative. I mean, I've had to look again at old fighters and spent hours watching them. But if Mrs Az divorces me because of the time spent watching Rock et al, I'm suing you, rowley and the rest of you Rocky fanbots.

azania wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

azania wrote:Windy, my views about some old timers may be bizarre, but I have the right to air them free from personal abuse. Of course they can be ridiculed and I actually enjoy the banter when they are ridiculed. But I draw a line at insults and name calling. Not just because I'm a mod, but because its uncalled for.

You're preaching to the converted, az.

You and I have NEVER had a problem, have we ?

No worries old man.

Debate is healthy. Differences are even healthier as it makes any board more interesting, entertaining and informative. I mean, I've had to look again at old fighters and spent hours watching them. But if Mrs Az divorces me because of the time spent watching Rock et al, I'm suing you, rowley and the rest of you Rocky fanbots.

That genuinely made me laugh out loud.

Sort of getting back to topic where would you rank Marciano in a lsit of ATG heavyweights?

Prettyboy not sure it wasd directed at me but I'll answer anyway. Personally have him around 6 or 7. Have Ali and Louis a clear one and two, then normally have Dempsey and Johnson slugging it out for three and four, then tend to have Jeffries at five and definitely above Rock.

Then it is between Holmes and Rocky for the sixth spot.

prettyboy1304 wrote:Sort of getting back to topic where would you rank Marciano in a lsit of ATG heavyweights?

No higher than top 300, probably...

Top 5 for me.

It is always harder to rank the undefeated - because there's no yardstick to see what beats them.

Clearly a skillful boxer will do well against Rocky. However - he will have to be prepared to ship an awful lot of punishment along the way. His punch - measured by the Ring as having the energy of an armour piercing bullet and the energy required to lift 1000lbs off the ground - wasn't just 1 hard shot. He could throw that punch from minute 1 to minute 45 of a title fight. This actually makes him relatively unique amongst punchers - most of whom have hard shots at the start, but slow later on (Tyson, Foreman) or have great deficiencies in chin (Rocky had a pretty good chin).

On days where I favour skill over will - Marciano falls slightly on my list.

On days where I'm in a more will and brawl over skill - Marciano moves higher.

prettyboy1304 wrote:Sort of getting back to topic where would you rank Marciano in a lsit of ATG heavyweights?

Based on his achievement, I'd rate him in the top 10. Based on him as a fighter I'd have at least 50 ahead of him in a H2H fight. Therefore it depends on how the ATG tables are drawn up. As a boxer, imo he's worse that rubbish. But his record speaks for itself. 49-0 will not be beaten in my lifetime. Lucky man in that he was in the right place at the right time. An appallingly weak period in HW boxing history. Comparable only to today. But the 3 standout fighters of today would probably beat him (Haye may get KO'd by him though due to his chin - he'd not get anywhere near Wlad).

I would have him 5th behind Ali, Louis, Johnson and Holmes. Very busy, great chin, big hitter, great fitness and the heart of a true champion. Not the quickest or most skillful but would just outwork and overpower most ATG's imo.

rowley wrote:Prettyboy not sure it wasd directed at me but I'll answer anyway. Personally have him around 6 or 7. Have Ali and Louis a clear one and two, then normally have Dempsey and Johnson slugging it out for three and four, then tend to have Jeffries at five and definitely above Rock.

Then it is between Holmes and Rocky for the sixth spot.

It was directed at anyone that wanted to talk boxing. I don't discriminate

azania wrote:An appallingly weak period in HW boxing history. Comparable only to today.

1915, Willard dethrones Johnson, and makes ONE defence in four years.

1928 to 1937, Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer and Braddock - each talented but flawed - play ' pass the parcel ' with the title and muster THREE successful defences among them.

1956 to 1962, D'Amato refuses to let Patterson fight the dangerous contenders, even though Floyd has the guts and the character to face them.

Marciano defended against the best of his day, all but two of them HOFers.

azania wrote:

prettyboy1304 wrote:Sort of getting back to topic where would you rank Marciano in a lsit of ATG heavyweights?

Based on his achievement, I'd rate him in the top 10. Based on him as a fighter I'd have at least 50 ahead of him in a H2H fight. Therefore it depends on how the ATG tables are drawn up. As a boxer, imo he's worse that rubbish. But his record speaks for itself. 49-0 will not be beaten in my lifetime. Lucky man in that he was in the right place at the right time. An appallingly weak period in HW boxing history. Comparable only to today. But the 3 standout fighters of today would probably beat him (Haye may get KO'd by him though due to his chin - he'd not get anywhere near Wlad).

Never expected that Both Klit's to beat Rocky. Wlad is a bit chinny has been floored a few times and stopped 3 times. Rocky is one of boxings hardest ever hitters would have walked both Klits and blew them away. Not even a contest with Haye over in 3 round Rocky would destroy him.

HumanWindmill wrote:

azania wrote:An appallingly weak period in HW boxing history. Comparable only to today.

1915, Willard dethrones Johnson, and makes ONE defence in four years.

1928 to 1937, Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer and Braddock - each talented but flawed - play ' pass the parcel ' with the title and muster THREE successful defences among them.

1956 to 1962, D'Amato refuses to let Patterson fight the dangerous contenders, even though Floyd has the guts and the character to face them.

Marciano defended against the best of his day, all but two of them HOFers.

Charles, Walcott and Moore were either blown up LHW or old men. Its irrespective that they were HOFers. Holmes beat the best HW in history who as is agreed was old, past it. To be blunt...shot to pieces. I'm not saying that Moore et al were as shot as Ali but they were past it nevertherless.

azania wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

azania wrote:An appallingly weak period in HW boxing history. Comparable only to today.

1915, Willard dethrones Johnson, and makes ONE defence in four years.

1928 to 1937, Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer and Braddock - each talented but flawed - play ' pass the parcel ' with the title and muster THREE successful defences among them.

1956 to 1962, D'Amato refuses to let Patterson fight the dangerous contenders, even though Floyd has the guts and the character to face them.

Marciano defended against the best of his day, all but two of them HOFers.

Charles, Walcott and Moore were either blown up LHW or old men. Its irrespective that they were HOFers. Holmes beat the best HW in history who as is agreed was old, past it. To be blunt...shot to pieces. I'm not saying that Moore et al were as shot as Ali but they were past it nevertherless.

Charles was two years older than Rocky. Walcott was in the form of his life, as was Moore.

Shall I - for the twentieth time - print out a list of Holmes' challengers ?

Charles, Walcott and Moore were still highly skilled, far more adept fighters than anyone we have fighting in the top division today.

Comparing them to the Ali of the Holmes fight is ridiculous.

hazharrison wrote:Charles, Walcott and Moore were still highly skilled, far more adept fighters than anyone we have fighting in the top division today.

Comparing them to the Ali of the Holmes fight is ridiculous.

Do you believe that those guys, at the time they fought Rocky, would be contenders or champions today?